9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grounds inter alia that :- "1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in passing the impugned reassessment order u/s 143(3)/147 and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without complying the mandatory conditions of section 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in passing the impugned reassessment u/s 143(3)/147, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not quashing the impugned r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere was an escapement of tax. AO, after declining the contentions raised by the assessee, reached the conclusion that when it stands proved that the purported investor company was only dealing in providing accommodation entries to various beneficiaries, share premium of Rs. 25,00,000/- received by the assessee company is found to be ingenuine transaction and thereby made an addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. 3. Assessee carried the matter by way of an appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssions which have been made part of the judicial record. 7. Undisputedly, during the assessment proceedings, AO on receipt of an information from DCIT, Central Circle 2(2), Mumbai, in the form of assessment order passed u/s 153C of the Act in case of M/s. Avance Technologies Limited wherein the Director of the said company had admitted in their statement that the company was only engaged in providing bogus accommodation entries. It is also not in dispute that on the basis of aforesaid information a show-cause notice was issued to the assessee on 08.12.2017 along with notice u/s 142(1). It is also not in dispute that the assessee company has been supplied with the copy of assessment order passed u/s 153C/143(3) for AY 2011-12 in case of M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfronting the "reasons recorded" to the assessee, which is extracted for ready perusal as under :- "24.7.17 Sh. S.R. Malta, Sr. Accounts Manager attended. Asked to submit information/detail relating to amounts credited in the books of account on account of share premium, share capital or advance of any kind confronted with the information received from DCIT, CC 2(2), Mumbai regarding receipt of Rs. 25,00,000/- on 25-2-2010 by the assessee company from M/s. Avance Technologies Ltd. It has been found." 11. Bare perusal of the aforesaid note recorded by the AO shows that only information received by him from DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai as to receipt of Rs. 25,00,000/- on 25.02.2010 by the assessee company from M/s. Avance Technologies Limited ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the Assessing Officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the Assessing Officer has to dispose of the objections, if filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the abovesaid five assessment years." 14. Ld. DR for the Revenue by relying upon the decision rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO - (2018) 94 taxmann.com 84 (SC) dismissing the SLP filed by the assessee contended that non-compliance of the procedure laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. GKN Driveshaft India Ltd. (supra) would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are distinguishable from the case of Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO (supra) because in that case, reasons recorded were supplied to which assessee had filed objections which had not been disposed off by the AO. But, in the instant case, reasons have not been recorded by the AO rather based the assessment order on the information received from DCIT, CC 2(2), Mumbai along with assessment order of M/s. Avance Technologies Limited passed u/s 153C of the Act, so the question of supplying reasons recorded to the assessee does not arise. 16. More particularly, when assessee had made a request for supply of the reasons recorded and the said request had not been adhered to and the AO proceeded to pass the assessment order even without providing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
